Obama backs mosque near ground zero

  • Thread starter Thread starter Musicadmirer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Teelynn said:
They do need to come out with more information. It would behoove this Imam to offer some facts about the project that Americans could feel grounded about. We will see how this plays out. Again…common sense is what is called for, but is sorely lacking.
Click to expand...
Indeed.
 
iamrefreshed said:
OK. Half-way home. 500 more posts til lockdown!😃
Click to expand...
Yep, I guess we have exhausted this post…not sure if any minds…or more importantly, hearts, will change on this matter. As always, it is in God’s hands…His will be done!

God bless you all!!
 
Teelynn said:
IF …This Imam and his group were to be a little more transparent, he could (given he was truthful and up front with his info) put this controversy to rest, or at least take some of the fuel out of the fire. But he chooses to fan the flames. The ball is in his court…and he does nothing. He will not even meet with officials. They have stated he has refused a discussion with officials.

As to YOUR QUESTION…I think it has been sufficiently answered numerous times in this thread. The answer is beyond redundant.
Click to expand...
So lets review my summary, you started with 1, I followed with 2, you’ve gone straight to 5 and 7a.

Just repeating that “it is insensitive,” “he could have moved it,” “they’re fanning the flames,” and “victims say so” does not explain why it is insensitive in the first place. An acceptable reason looks like this:
I feel this is insensitive because:
–The imam has made some specific hurtful claim.
–Here is a donation from a known terrorist organization.
–Here are those involved making disparaging remarks about victims.

Unacceptable reasons look like this
I feel this is insensitive because:
–Other people feel that way. (why do they feel that way?)
–Muslims are fanning the flames (there are no flames until someone declares it insensitive, what is the reason for the initial declaration?)
–Islam has teachings x, y, or z. (Teachings x, y, and z must be both a justification for the terrorists and also believed by the imam or this is a red herring)
TheTrueCentrist said:
  1. Opposition group: The Islamic centre is insensitive.
  2. Support group: Why is the Islamic centre insensitive?
  3. Opposition group: Because those involved with the Islamic centre are Muslim, as were the 9/11 terrorists.
  4. Support group: But those involved with the Islamic centre, along with the majority of other Muslims, have denounced the terrorists’ interpretation of Islam. Therefore equating the two groups because of religion is not reasonable.
  5. Opposition group: But those involved with the Islamic centre have not proven they have not taken money from terrorists, nor can we be sure they do not sympathize with the terrorists.
  6. Support group: No, but we have no reason to be suspicious. Why do you suspect the Muslims involved with the Islamic centre are lying about their beliefs and intentions?
  7. Opposition group:
    a) Normal response: I’m not saying I don’t believe them, I am saying that if they wanted to be sensitive, they could build somewhere else.
    b) Prejudiced response: They are not being truthful because they are Muslims, we should be suspicious because Islam says x y and z. Discussion ended.
    c) Possible response (not yet observed): You are right, I guess it does not make sense to be offended by this mosque. Discussion ended.
    d) Possible response (observed, but evidence is insubstantial or anecdotal): no, here is substantial evidence that the centre is affiliated with terrorism. Discussion shifted to the validity of evidence.
  8. Support group response to 7a: Why is the Islamic centre insensitive? (goto 3)
Click to expand...
 
tjm190 said:
Occupation of holy land as justification for war- now where have I seen this before…

Furthermore, just about EVERYONE fights when they are under occupation- it’s not a religious thing.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Armed conquest of North Africa, the southern Levant, the Byzantine Empire, etc, now = a military base at the behest and approval of the recognized government.???

Intellectually dishonest.
 
tjm190 said:
Idolators≠Christians or Jews.
Click to expand...
I’ll be sure to let the world’s Muslims know that their interpretation of the Qu’ran has been incorrect for the past 1400 years or so.

Do you know how I can get a hold of all major fiqhs, to let them know they need to start admitting Christians and Jews into Mecca and Medina?
 
scipio337 said:
I’ll be sure to let the world’s Muslims know that their interpretation of the Qu’ran has been incorrect for the past 1400 years or so.

Do you know how I can get a hold of all major fiqhs, to let them know they need to start admitting Christians and Jews into Mecca and Medina?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is important that they get the correct interpetation from us Catholics.😉
 
tjm190 said:
Occupation of holy land as justification for war- now where have I seen this before…

Furthermore, just about EVERYONE fights when they are under occupation- it’s not a religious thing.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t aware that the twin Towers were occupied territories.

I have not read a single comment from anybody involved in the planning of the attacks on the twin tower that did not invoke Islam. To try and separate this attack from its religious underpinnings is ridiculous.
 
Well, if they build it there. It will not be long after it’s completion and Al Jazeera will air a video of terrorist mocking those who lost family and friends on 9/11.

That is why it is insensitive and should be moved. If they don’t then I highly doubt there will be much pity from Americans if someone retaliates after this happening.
 
I think Obama’s issue (and it appears others share his issue) here is that he is obtuse and insensitive and that he lacks an ability to empathize, perhaps because he is reacting as an attorney, when he would do well to react simply as an American who remembers 9/11.
 
For those who want to build the mosque near Ground Zero and their supporters, it seems that it is more important to be right than to do the right thing. No reason or amount of explanation about insensitivity would be enough. It is amazing that survivors and families of the dead from the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers, and over 60% of Americans, who do not support the building of the mosque are now being labeled as unenlightened at best, bigots at worst.

In going back to the OP, Obama’s backing the mosque last Friday (although he softened his position on the matter the following day), Daniel Greenfield could not express the irony better and points to who the real bigots are:

“… Obama proclaimed that he supports the building of the Ground Zero mosque as part of his “unshakable commitment to religious freedom”. Which of course sounds very noble and good, until you ask a single question, Where is the religious freedom in the Muslim world?

Obama has made the case for Islam in America, on the grounds that America’s religious diversity promotes the religious freedom of all. Islam no less than any other belief system. Yet if introducing Islam into America promotes religious freedom, then why is there no religious freedom in the Muslim world? Why are churches firebombed in Malaysia because Christians presumed to use the word Allah? Why are non-Muslims forbidden to enter the city of Mecca, from which Jews and Christians were ethnically cleansed by Mohammed? Why are Coptic Christians being oppressed and humiliated by the Egyptian government? Why are Muslims murdering Buddhist teachers in Thailand? There are a thousand examples, all of which add up to a single conclusion-- Muslims demand religious freedom, yet are not willing to give it to others.
…
Obama concluded his remarks by saying: “And we can only achieve “liberty and justice for all” if we live by that one rule at the heart of every great religion, including Islam — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.” But that is not the rule at the heart of Islam. And this is not the first time that he has tried to sell that particular lie. But Islam never equates Muslims with non-Muslims, as Obama pretends it does. Its offer of brotherhood is only open to fellow Muslims. Its tolerance is only for fellow Muslims. And that is at the heart of the problem. And it is why the rise of Islam means the end of liberty and justice for all. To stand for liberty and justice is to take a stand against Islamic bigotry.”

Full Article
 
Centrist, earlier in this thread you tried to illustrate your arguments by comparing it to Rosa Parks and racism towards black people in times earlier. I would like to do the same for you to understand what some (not all) people are trying to say in opposition to the particular location of the Mosque.

I have heard incredibly bigoted remarks by people who were victims of sex abuse of the clergy. While they would say things that I would vehemently disagree with (Iike all Priests are perverts), I would be very patient and careful of what I would say to them because its easy for me to fight back (verbally) but I have to say that I haven’t gone through what they went through and I think compassion is in order towards them.

Now from what I have read, the opposition to the planned Mosque is because of its close proximity to Ground Zero. If the people financing this Mosque were to move it say 5-10 miles away, then I would like to think that the controversy would go away. Why can’t we show some compassion towards the families of the victims of 9/11 and relocate it somewhere else?
 
InSearchofGrace said:
For those who want to build the mosque near Ground Zero and their supporters, it seems that it is more important to be right than to do the right thing. No reason or amount of explanation about insensitivity would be enough. It is amazing that survivors and families of the dead from the 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers, and over 60% of Americans, who do not support the building of the mosque are now being labeled as unenlightened at best, bigots at worst.
Click to expand...
I prefer to understand the reasons for the things I do, and not just go with what feels right. I want a single reason why I should believe that the Muslims are being insensitive by building this center.

That response to President Obama was incredibly short sighted. We have rights here in America, and we give them to everyone. We do this not because it is easy but because we, as Americans, believe that everyone has certain inalienable rights. The reason we are able to frown on intolerance in Egypt, Malaysia, Mecca, or anywhere else is because we hold ourselves to a higher standard of tolerance. If we treat Muslims with any less respect than other religions, we lose the high ground. We make ourselves no better than the bigots in any of the places he mentioned.
 
Kind of off topic here, but here goes.

I was thinking today that there is a sort of irony in the name “Cordoba Initiative”. Having also seen repeated Muslim references to Andalusia as “Al Andaluz” I don’t much doubt what is intended by the name “Cordoba Initiative”.

But there is a superficial irony to it, at least, doubtless unintended. For a long time, Muslims occupied most of Spain, with Cordoba being more or less their last foothold. During their reign, of course, Islam was supreme. After the Christian reconquest, Islam disappeared very quickly, notwithstanding that there were a lot of adherents to it before. Sure, some left. Some few were killed in battle. Some remained as Muslims, which the then-Christian state allowed them to do, though it wasn’t as advantageous as it was to convert. Most converted to Christianity.

Islamic countries enforce Islam at the point of a gun, or at least the point of a rock or sword. Do they fear the solidity of their subjects’ devotion that much? Maybe so, and maybe with good reason. Without the imposition of Sharia, (and, one supposes “honor killings”) how good are its long-term survival prospects really?

In a generation or two, we’ll find out how faithful to Islam the children and grandchildren of those from Muslim countries remain here. Without question, Islam (or at least Arabic culture, which overlays Islam heavily) is not terribly kind to women, and not much kinder to underachievers, nonconformists and oddballs.

“Cordoba Initiative”. Hmmmmmmm.
 
Ridgerunner said:
A “torch carrying mob”??? Is that how some view the sentiments of their countrymen? This has been compared, on here, to the plan to build a convent at Auschwitz; a plan that was withdrawn because it violated the sensitivities of a people who had every human reason to be sensitive about it. Did the nuns kill Jews in WWII? No. Did they have a legal right to build at Auschwitz? Yes. Did they have a moral obligation to change their plan, once that offense was clear? Yes.

There is something in human heart that recoils from anything that looks like exultation over the tragedy of another. So ancient is the recognition of that, that Homer had the gods strike Achilleus down for dragging the body of Hektor behind his chariot; something that, in the ancient code of warfare, Achilleus had every “legal” right to do. And here, some two and a half millenia later, there are those of us who still don’t “get it”.

And let’s be real about this. Calling it the “Cordoba Initiative” makes the exultation as plain as plain can be made. But even if we ignore that, it has to be recognized that the murders of 911 were committed in the name of Islam, and Muslims could reasonably be expected to exercise more charity toward people of this nation than this plan evidences. Even some Muslims have publicly recognized that and expressed their opposition to the plan, precisely because it has that “dragging the body of Hektor” look to it.

I realize the twists and turns of partisan politics can sometimes motivate people to take a narrow position defending the indefensible. That motivation should not, however, extend to calling people “a torch carrying mob” who watched as people, driven by fire to desperation and hopelessness, jumped from those windows to their deaths, or perhaps those who never found so much as a scrap of a body of their loved ones to bury.

No, the plan should be withdrawn out of a very normal sense of human decency, and people are right to be offended by the refusal to do it, and by the defense of that refusal.
Click to expand...
:tiphat: Thank You!
 
Oh and BTW, why is it that we are footing the bill for this Imam to travel around to Islamic countries? I believe to the tune of almost $20,000…just wondering the “why” of it all?:hmmm:… Anyone?
 
FWIW, I got a touching insight yesterday on having pre-formed biases against groups of people rather than on valuing and relating to them as individuals and fellow humans.

CNN’s footage of the flooding in Pakistan showed a haggard group of stranded villagers being given meagre supplies by their military. One of the first bottles of water was handed to a man, who instinctively passed it to the woman standing next to him - I don’t know what impressed me more: the realization that he has the same protective instincts of any decent male on the planet or the realization that his actions came as a surprise to me!

Despite not having a blanket unfavorable opinion of Muslim society (I’ve had a some great relationships with people of that faith), my overall impression of womens’ role in a Muslim country is one of complete subservience. It took one millisecond clip to allow me to glimpse in that man, the humanity that lies in all of us.

Maybe this matter of the mosque is better dealt with one on one by the people most directly affected - that is, if it’s not way too late…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top